Title: The Corporation Director: Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, & Joel Bakan Release year: 2003
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central narrative of this film is the development and evolution of the corporation in our time as a powerful and corrupt entity. The 14th Amendment was created to protect the rights of newly released slaves and corporations persuaded the courts that this policy should apply to them because a corporation should be considered a person. This film points out that corporations are driven to create a profit and are never satisfied with maintaining the status quo. Profit is the bottom line and corporations as a whole do not feel their actions need to be socially responsible.
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The film supports the narrative of corporations being evil and corrupt by presenting data about large corporations moving to third world countries for production. This enables the companies to pay extremely low wages, on the order of $0.70 per hour, and sell the products at high retail prices to make enormous profits. Corporations thrive on the petrochemical industry creating new products and deny the negative health effects that these products have had on our society. Monsanto’s growth hormone for dairy cows caused negative health effects on cows and humans, yet it enabled the company to make even more money. Monsanto’s Agent Orange caused birth defects and cancer in Southeast Asia and the company only received a slap on the wrist. An example was provided about a river in Brewer, ME being contaminated from paper mill discharge and everyone just learned to accept it. Corporations should not have this kind of control over us. They need to be held socially responsible whether corporations do it from within or are regulated by government policies.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Political? Legal? Economic? Technological? Media and Informational? Organizational? Educational? Behavioral? Cultural? Ecological?
The Corporation draws out several sustainability problems that need to be addressed. One behavioral problem is that corporations have reckless disregard for the safety of others. Corporations feel no guilt. They are deceitful by repeatedly lying about negative effects of their products. With respect to culture, our civilization resembles attempts at first flight with small plane falling off a cliff and we don’t realize we are doomed because the ground is so far away. Our society has become dependent on the economic profits made by corporations and thus the government does not enforce policies as strictly as they should for these corporations. It is a sad fact, but the film points out that devastation brings business opportunity for traders and brokers. A legal issue that we should be concerned with is that corporations and people are now allowed to patent any living thing created in a lab besides a full birth human being.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The most compelling part of the film was the argument that corporations, such as IBM, would collude with Nazi forces to make a profit knowing that their technology was being used to log people during the Holocaust. This shows that corporations will stop at nothing to make a profit and do not believe they have social responsibility. The film also pointed out that many corporations have been caught doing business with defined enemies of the United States, and after a slap on the wrist these business transactions continue.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
I was not convinced about the punishments that corporations receive for causing environmental or health problems and not being held socially responsible. Currently, it seems that corporations are forced to pay a fine that is nearly negligible to them compared to their profits. The Corporation could have incorporated suggestions about what should be done to discourage corporations from causing social problems in the first place. If the punishments for environmental pollution and health problems were severe enough economically, corporations might think more proactively about the effects of the decisions they make.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
This film addresses any person who buys and consumes goods and services, which is nearly everyone on the planet. We are all influenced by advertisements and it is how corporations persuade us to buy their products. Children are also influenced and nag their parents for items they have been told they must have from stores or food they have been told is delicious. The film mostly targets educated people in the first world.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The Corporation could have added more information about how companies can be socially responsible and profitable. The example of Interface aimed to reduce their environmental impact was helpful, but I feel that sustainability can be a profitable business venture and I wish they had demonstrated that concept better.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The film suggests that we all need to join the fight to change our democratic system and the goals of business. The CEO of Interface looks forward to fundamental changes to businesses that would result in companies that seek to do no harm to our environment and health. Ultimately, he hopes that after many struggles we may be able to reach the peak of the sustainability mountain and leave no footprint on the environment. It will be hard to take action against the essence of corporations that have become ingrained in our society. I don’t think we will be able to convince corporations to be socially responsible or sustainable unless government economically forces corporations to do so, or until sustainability is made profitable.
What additional information has the film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)
This film compelled me to seek out the current state of pollution from paper mills in my home state of Maine. I found that in 2009 the paper mills released 11.1 million pounds of chemicals into the environment. Although this amount was within the allowable discharge limits, it seems like far too much pollution that should be allowed. I want to push my state legislators to place stricter regulations on the emissions of Maine’s paper mills.
I also wanted to investigate and boycott all Monsanto products and push for stricter regulations for the corporation, while recognizing the conflict of interest many of our politicians have who are involved in the regulatory system. I found that Monsanto is the maker of the artificial sweetener called Aspartame, which has replaced some natural sugar in many products. I have already been aware of this artificial sweetener and that it appears on the ingredient list of many products. I already avoid eating and buying all products that contain Aspartame and now that I know that Monsanto makes it, I will absolutely not want to buy these products. Instead, I will take my chances with natural sugar.
Annotation #5
Word Count: 1,201
Title: The Corporation
Director: Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, & Joel Bakan
Release year: 2003
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central narrative of this film is the development and evolution of the corporation in our time as a powerful and corrupt entity. The 14th Amendment was created to protect the rights of newly released slaves and corporations persuaded the courts that this policy should apply to them because a corporation should be considered a person. This film points out that corporations are driven to create a profit and are never satisfied with maintaining the status quo. Profit is the bottom line and corporations as a whole do not feel their actions need to be socially responsible.
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The film supports the narrative of corporations being evil and corrupt by presenting data about large corporations moving to third world countries for production. This enables the companies to pay extremely low wages, on the order of $0.70 per hour, and sell the products at high retail prices to make enormous profits. Corporations thrive on the petrochemical industry creating new products and deny the negative health effects that these products have had on our society. Monsanto’s growth hormone for dairy cows caused negative health effects on cows and humans, yet it enabled the company to make even more money. Monsanto’s Agent Orange caused birth defects and cancer in Southeast Asia and the company only received a slap on the wrist. An example was provided about a river in Brewer, ME being contaminated from paper mill discharge and everyone just learned to accept it. Corporations should not have this kind of control over us. They need to be held socially responsible whether corporations do it from within or are regulated by government policies.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out? Political? Legal? Economic? Technological? Media and Informational? Organizational? Educational? Behavioral? Cultural? Ecological?
The Corporation draws out several sustainability problems that need to be addressed. One behavioral problem is that corporations have reckless disregard for the safety of others. Corporations feel no guilt. They are deceitful by repeatedly lying about negative effects of their products. With respect to culture, our civilization resembles attempts at first flight with small plane falling off a cliff and we don’t realize we are doomed because the ground is so far away. Our society has become dependent on the economic profits made by corporations and thus the government does not enforce policies as strictly as they should for these corporations. It is a sad fact, but the film points out that devastation brings business opportunity for traders and brokers. A legal issue that we should be concerned with is that corporations and people are now allowed to patent any living thing created in a lab besides a full birth human being.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The most compelling part of the film was the argument that corporations, such as IBM, would collude with Nazi forces to make a profit knowing that their technology was being used to log people during the Holocaust. This shows that corporations will stop at nothing to make a profit and do not believe they have social responsibility. The film also pointed out that many corporations have been caught doing business with defined enemies of the United States, and after a slap on the wrist these business transactions continue.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
I was not convinced about the punishments that corporations receive for causing environmental or health problems and not being held socially responsible. Currently, it seems that corporations are forced to pay a fine that is nearly negligible to them compared to their profits. The Corporation could have incorporated suggestions about what should be done to discourage corporations from causing social problems in the first place. If the punishments for environmental pollution and health problems were severe enough economically, corporations might think more proactively about the effects of the decisions they make.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
This film addresses any person who buys and consumes goods and services, which is nearly everyone on the planet. We are all influenced by advertisements and it is how corporations persuade us to buy their products. Children are also influenced and nag their parents for items they have been told they must have from stores or food they have been told is delicious. The film mostly targets educated people in the first world.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The Corporation could have added more information about how companies can be socially responsible and profitable. The example of Interface aimed to reduce their environmental impact was helpful, but I feel that sustainability can be a profitable business venture and I wish they had demonstrated that concept better.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The film suggests that we all need to join the fight to change our democratic system and the goals of business. The CEO of Interface looks forward to fundamental changes to businesses that would result in companies that seek to do no harm to our environment and health. Ultimately, he hopes that after many struggles we may be able to reach the peak of the sustainability mountain and leave no footprint on the environment. It will be hard to take action against the essence of corporations that have become ingrained in our society. I don’t think we will be able to convince corporations to be socially responsible or sustainable unless government economically forces corporations to do so, or until sustainability is made profitable.
What additional information has the film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)
This film compelled me to seek out the current state of pollution from paper mills in my home state of Maine. I found that in 2009 the paper mills released 11.1 million pounds of chemicals into the environment. Although this amount was within the allowable discharge limits, it seems like far too much pollution that should be allowed. I want to push my state legislators to place stricter regulations on the emissions of Maine’s paper mills.
http://www.nrcm.org/news_detail.asp?news=2910
I also wanted to investigate and boycott all Monsanto products and push for stricter regulations for the corporation, while recognizing the conflict of interest many of our politicians have who are involved in the regulatory system. I found that Monsanto is the maker of the artificial sweetener called Aspartame, which has replaced some natural sugar in many products. I have already been aware of this artificial sweetener and that it appears on the ingredient list of many products. I already avoid eating and buying all products that contain Aspartame and now that I know that Monsanto makes it, I will absolutely not want to buy these products. Instead, I will take my chances with natural sugar.
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/aspartame-nutrasweet.aspx